Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look. - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look. - Ubuntu ; Ignoramus10476 wrote: > I used fedora for years and switched to Ubuntu. It is very well put > together and works much more smoothly than Fedora. It does have some > real benefits that accrue to users like me. I, ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 76

Thread: Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

  1. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    Ignoramus10476 wrote:
    > I used fedora for years and switched to Ubuntu. It is very well put
    > together and works much more smoothly than Fedora. It does have some
    > real benefits that accrue to users like me.


    I, too, agree that Ubuntu is more polished than the rest of the Linux
    distributions, but until big application makers such as Adobe and others
    support it with their first class applications, Linux is nothing,
    unfortunately

  2. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:35:30 -0400, nospam wrote:

    > Ignoramus10476 wrote:
    >> I used fedora for years and switched to Ubuntu. It is very well put
    >> together and works much more smoothly than Fedora. It does have some
    >> real benefits that accrue to users like me.

    >
    > I, too, agree that Ubuntu is more polished than the rest of the Linux
    > distributions, but until big application makers such as Adobe and others
    > support it with their first class applications, Linux is nothing,
    > unfortunately


    Actually Adobe and others are fairly irrelevant.

    Sticking with Adobe, let's look at Photoshop.

    Other than graphics artists and related people, who actually legally and
    legitimately owns and uses Photoshop? What percentage of people is there
    that actually can use Photoshop to it's fullest extend? I know I sure
    can't. I'm lucky if I can manage to draw a straight line.

    There is plenty of software in existence that can meet the needs of the
    average person. The biggest thing that Photoshop simply has going for
    itself is the name.

    Now how about accounting?

    Sure, there is Quickbooks and the people I know in Accounting love some
    features about it. I also hear them curse and absolutely hate some other
    things about it. So it's got it's good and bad parts.

    But what about home users? Personally, I just use Gnucash and call it a
    day. I can enter all my expenses and bills and categorize things the way
    I want. And, it's got more graphs and reports to show with than I even
    know what they all mean. About the only report I give a crap about is the
    expense barchart so I can see where my expenses are and what may be worth
    looking at for improvement....So even if this program doesn't have all
    the features Quickbooks has, it already has more than I'll ever need...

    Office?

    Sure, Ms Office has some neat features. But let's be realistic....who
    needs a $300-$400 office package in order to write a letter to grandma?

    Point that I'm trying to get across is, while all these high end packages
    may have some neat features that surely there are people out there,
    especially in the business world and maybe even on occasion in the home
    user world, who wouldn't want to or can't live without....for the masses
    at home, in my opinion, they are beyond overkill.

    And so far, I've always been shown to be correct on that when introducing
    average people with little to know technical knowledge of any kind to
    Linux. It's those people, the people many windows advocates would claim
    could never handle linux because it's too complicated, that I've seen to
    best with it and none of them would want to return to windows.

    In some cases, they've even come to me and told me how they've had
    relatives switch away from windows based on their recommendation,
    completely uninfluenced and unassisted by me. Gee, can't be that
    complicated after all I suppose?

    --
    Stephan
    1986 Pontiac Fiero GT

    君の事思い出す日なんてないのは
    君の事忘れたときがないから

  3. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    Stephan Rose writes:

    > On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:35:30 -0400, nospam wrote:
    >
    >> Ignoramus10476 wrote:
    >>> I used fedora for years and switched to Ubuntu. It is very well put
    >>> together and works much more smoothly than Fedora. It does have some
    >>> real benefits that accrue to users like me.

    >>
    >> I, too, agree that Ubuntu is more polished than the rest of the Linux
    >> distributions, but until big application makers such as Adobe and others
    >> support it with their first class applications, Linux is nothing,
    >> unfortunately

    >
    > Actually Adobe and others are fairly irrelevant.
    >
    > Sticking with Adobe, let's look at Photoshop.
    >
    > Other than graphics artists and related people, who actually legally and
    > legitimately owns and uses Photoshop? What percentage of people is there
    > that actually can use Photoshop to it's fullest extend? I know I sure
    > can't. I'm lucky if I can manage to draw a straight line.
    >
    > There is plenty of software in existence that can meet the needs of the
    > average person. The biggest thing that Photoshop simply has going for
    > itself is the name.


    What utter nonsense. There are hundreds of thousand professional artists
    who use it. Your, and mine, ignorance of its usage should not be used as
    a justified reason to dispute its importance.

    > Now how about accounting?
    >
    > Sure, there is Quickbooks and the people I know in Accounting love some
    > features about it. I also hear them curse and absolutely hate some other
    > things about it. So it's got it's good and bad parts.


    No news there.

    >
    > But what about home users? Personally, I just use Gnucash and call it a
    > day. I can enter all my expenses and bills and categorize things the way
    > I want. And, it's got more graphs and reports to show with than I even
    > know what they all mean. About the only report I give a crap about is the
    > expense barchart so I can see where my expenses are and what may be worth
    > looking at for improvement....So even if this program doesn't have all
    > the features Quickbooks has, it already has more than I'll ever
    > need...


    For home use, maybe fine. Does you local tax office except it though?
    Mine doesn't.

    >
    > Office?
    >
    > Sure, Ms Office has some neat features. But let's be realistic....who
    > needs a $300-$400 office package in order to write a letter to
    > grandma?


    Huh? What are you waffling on about? O paid significantly less than that
    and used word/excel for all sorts of things same as I now do with the
    inferior OO equivalents.

    >
    > Point that I'm trying to get across is, while all these high end packages
    > may have some neat features that surely there are people out there,
    > especially in the business world and maybe even on occasion in the home
    > user world, who wouldn't want to or can't live without....for the masses
    > at home, in my opinion, they are beyond overkill.


    I tend to agree in some cases.

    >
    > And so far, I've always been shown to be correct on that when introducing
    > average people with little to know technical knowledge of any kind to
    > Linux. It's those people, the people many windows advocates would claim
    > could never handle linux because it's too complicated, that I've seen to
    > best with it and none of them would want to return to windows.


    Unless they wanted proper connectivity with their PDA, their mobile or
    wanted to play the latest games. I agree.

    >
    > In some cases, they've even come to me and told me how they've had
    > relatives switch away from windows based on their recommendation,
    > completely uninfluenced and unassisted by me. Gee, can't be that
    > complicated after all I suppose?


    I wouldn't say its necessarily complicated. I would say that not enough
    "new gadgets" have decent Linux support though. The wireless scene is
    still a mess IMO. And the video card support can still be hairy unless
    you use a "non conforming to ideology" release like Ubuntu.

    Who here syncs their phone on Linux? I worked out my own way and posted
    it here with ivman. (Oh I know I dont really use linux according to the
    COLA morons). But things like that screw up people thinking of moving.


    How to sync a mobile phone with Ubuntu on connect using multisync


    --
    "For example, user interfaces are _usually_ better in commercial software.
    I'm not saying that this is always true, but in many cases the user
    interface to a program is the most important part for a commercial
    company..." Linus Torvalds

  4. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:40:38 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > Stephan Rose writes:
    >
    >> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:35:30 -0400, nospam wrote:
    >>
    >>> Ignoramus10476 wrote:
    >>>> I used fedora for years and switched to Ubuntu. It is very well put
    >>>> together and works much more smoothly than Fedora. It does have some
    >>>> real benefits that accrue to users like me.
    >>>
    >>> I, too, agree that Ubuntu is more polished than the rest of the Linux
    >>> distributions, but until big application makers such as Adobe and others
    >>> support it with their first class applications, Linux is nothing,
    >>> unfortunately

    >>
    >> Actually Adobe and others are fairly irrelevant.
    >>
    >> Sticking with Adobe, let's look at Photoshop.
    >>
    >> Other than graphics artists and related people, who actually legally and
    >> legitimately owns and uses Photoshop? What percentage of people is there
    >> that actually can use Photoshop to it's fullest extend? I know I sure
    >> can't. I'm lucky if I can manage to draw a straight line.
    >>
    >> There is plenty of software in existence that can meet the needs of the
    >> average person. The biggest thing that Photoshop simply has going for
    >> itself is the name.

    >
    > What utter nonsense. There are hundreds of thousand professional artists
    > who use it. Your, and mine, ignorance of its usage should not be used as
    > a justified reason to dispute its importance.
    >
    >> Now how about accounting?
    >>
    >> Sure, there is Quickbooks and the people I know in Accounting love some
    >> features about it. I also hear them curse and absolutely hate some other
    >> things about it. So it's got it's good and bad parts.

    >
    > No news there.
    >
    >>
    >> But what about home users? Personally, I just use Gnucash and call it a
    >> day. I can enter all my expenses and bills and categorize things the way
    >> I want. And, it's got more graphs and reports to show with than I even
    >> know what they all mean. About the only report I give a crap about is the
    >> expense barchart so I can see where my expenses are and what may be worth
    >> looking at for improvement....So even if this program doesn't have all
    >> the features Quickbooks has, it already has more than I'll ever
    >> need...

    >
    > For home use, maybe fine. Does you local tax office except it though?
    > Mine doesn't.
    >
    >>
    >> Office?
    >>
    >> Sure, Ms Office has some neat features. But let's be realistic....who
    >> needs a $300-$400 office package in order to write a letter to
    >> grandma?

    >
    > Huh? What are you waffling on about? O paid significantly less than that
    > and used word/excel for all sorts of things same as I now do with the
    > inferior OO equivalents.
    >
    >>
    >> Point that I'm trying to get across is, while all these high end packages
    >> may have some neat features that surely there are people out there,
    >> especially in the business world and maybe even on occasion in the home
    >> user world, who wouldn't want to or can't live without....for the masses
    >> at home, in my opinion, they are beyond overkill.

    >
    > I tend to agree in some cases.
    >
    >>
    >> And so far, I've always been shown to be correct on that when introducing
    >> average people with little to know technical knowledge of any kind to
    >> Linux. It's those people, the people many windows advocates would claim
    >> could never handle linux because it's too complicated, that I've seen to
    >> best with it and none of them would want to return to windows.

    >
    > Unless they wanted proper connectivity with their PDA, their mobile or
    > wanted to play the latest games. I agree.
    >
    >>
    >> In some cases, they've even come to me and told me how they've had
    >> relatives switch away from windows based on their recommendation,
    >> completely uninfluenced and unassisted by me. Gee, can't be that
    >> complicated after all I suppose?

    >
    > I wouldn't say its necessarily complicated. I would say that not enough
    > "new gadgets" have decent Linux support though. The wireless scene is
    > still a mess IMO. And the video card support can still be hairy unless
    > you use a "non conforming to ideology" release like Ubuntu.
    >
    > Who here syncs their phone on Linux? I worked out my own way and posted
    > it here with ivman. (Oh I know I dont really use linux according to the
    > COLA morons). But things like that screw up people thinking of moving.
    >
    >
    > How to sync a mobile phone with Ubuntu on connect using multisync


    Well put Hadron!

    Another thing is that students use some of these programs, especially
    Photoshop and they get student discounts or in some cases the price is
    covered in their tuition so it's not and issue.

    It's all about standards.

    Do you think an accountant is going to take a chance using your Gnucash
    files?
    Even if his program can read them, why would he put himself in a
    potentially legally troubling situation like that?

    Do you think a lawyer is going to take a chance with OpenOffice importing
    Microsoft Word documents EXACTLY?
    When every single comma, period and so forth can make a big difference in
    the interpretation of the document do you think a law office would take a
    chance on Open Office?

    They would have to be crazy...
    For $300 or less they can have the real macoy, MS Office.
    Why go with a copycat?

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  5. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    "Hadron" stated in post
    fsoca1$nt5$1@registered.motzarella.org on 3/30/08 8:40 AM:

    >> Other than graphics artists and related people, who actually legally and
    >> legitimately owns and uses Photoshop? What percentage of people is there
    >> that actually can use Photoshop to it's fullest extend? I know I sure
    >> can't. I'm lucky if I can manage to draw a straight line.
    >>
    >> There is plenty of software in existence that can meet the needs of the
    >> average person. The biggest thing that Photoshop simply has going for
    >> itself is the name.

    >
    > What utter nonsense. There are hundreds of thousand professional artists
    > who use it. Your, and mine, ignorance of its usage should not be used as
    > a justified reason to dispute its importance.


    I certainly am not primarily an image editing professional but I know I use
    a number of features of Photoshop that are simply not available in Gimp or
    other OSS tools (that I know of). Just some of those features:

    * adjustment layers
    * smart layers
    * non-destructive "smart" filters
    * better selection tools, refinement of edges, etc.
    * Image warp
    * Layer alignment and blending tools
    * layer sets
    * vanishing point
    * vector based layers with effects
    * liquefy
    * clipping groups
    * web slices
    * text handling: kerning, baseline shift, etc.
    * snapshots in undo history
    * history brush
    * free transform
    * text blending (drop shadow, etc.)
    * simple automation recording

    I could be wrong on some of those (I have not used Gimp much)... but from
    what I recall Gimp lacks them all.

    >> Now how about accounting?
    >>
    >> Sure, there is Quickbooks and the people I know in Accounting love some
    >> features about it. I also hear them curse and absolutely hate some other
    >> things about it. So it's got it's good and bad parts.

    >
    > No news there.


    I used to work for Intuit supporting Quickbooks little brother, Quicken. It
    is - or was - a mess of a program. If nothing else the UI was horrid and the
    file groups that it used were prone to corruption.



    --
    The direct use of physical force is so poor a solution to the problem of
    limited resources that it is commonly employed only by small children and
    great nations. - David Friedman


  6. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:31:16 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:

    >
    > But what about home users? Personally, I just use Gnucash and call it a
    > day. I can enter all my expenses and bills and categorize things the way
    > I want. And, it's got more graphs and reports to show with than I even
    > know what they all mean. About the only report I give a crap about is
    > the expense barchart so I can see where my expenses are and what may be
    > worth looking at for improvement....So even if this program doesn't have
    > all the features Quickbooks has, it already has more than I'll ever
    > need...


    A turbotax port would be nice, especially for us sole proprietors who are
    trying to run the biz as economically as possible.



    --
    I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less
    than half of you half as well as you deserve.
    -- J. R. R. Tolkien

  7. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    rick writes:

    > On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:31:16 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> But what about home users? Personally, I just use Gnucash and call it a
    >> day. I can enter all my expenses and bills and categorize things the way
    >> I want. And, it's got more graphs and reports to show with than I even
    >> know what they all mean. About the only report I give a crap about is
    >> the expense barchart so I can see where my expenses are and what may be
    >> worth looking at for improvement....So even if this program doesn't have
    >> all the features Quickbooks has, it already has more than I'll ever
    >> need...

    >
    > A turbotax port would be nice, especially for us sole proprietors who are
    > trying to run the biz as economically as possible.


    What would be nice would be one solution that works - not yet another
    half finished "port".

    --
    I thought you had a CS degree? And you never did a compiler course? I am
    amazed! - Hadron Quark, COLA
    Really? Why are you amazed? Do you think computer science courses include courses on writing
    compilers too? REALLY? - Andrew "Spike1" Halliwell BSc CS, COLA
    -- COLA where they put the lunacy in Advocacy.

  8. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 18:35:14 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > rick writes:
    >
    >> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:31:16 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> But what about home users? Personally, I just use Gnucash and call it
    >>> a day. I can enter all my expenses and bills and categorize things the
    >>> way I want. And, it's got more graphs and reports to show with than I
    >>> even know what they all mean. About the only report I give a crap
    >>> about is the expense barchart so I can see where my expenses are and
    >>> what may be worth looking at for improvement....So even if this
    >>> program doesn't have all the features Quickbooks has, it already has
    >>> more than I'll ever need...

    >>
    >> A turbotax port would be nice, especially for us sole proprietors who
    >> are trying to run the biz as economically as possible.

    >
    > What would be nice would be one solution that works - not yet another
    > half finished "port".


    So, tell us again why you use all these half finished ports?

    --
    Rick

  9. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:40:38 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > Stephan Rose writes:
    >
    >> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:35:30 -0400, nospam wrote:
    >>
    >>> Ignoramus10476 wrote:
    >>>> I used fedora for years and switched to Ubuntu. It is very well put
    >>>> together and works much more smoothly than Fedora. It does have some
    >>>> real benefits that accrue to users like me.
    >>>
    >>> I, too, agree that Ubuntu is more polished than the rest of the Linux
    >>> distributions, but until big application makers such as Adobe and
    >>> others support it with their first class applications, Linux is
    >>> nothing, unfortunately

    >>
    >> Actually Adobe and others are fairly irrelevant.
    >>
    >> Sticking with Adobe, let's look at Photoshop.
    >>
    >> Other than graphics artists and related people, who actually legally
    >> and legitimately owns and uses Photoshop? What percentage of people is
    >> there that actually can use Photoshop to it's fullest extend? I know I
    >> sure can't. I'm lucky if I can manage to draw a straight line.
    >>
    >> There is plenty of software in existence that can meet the needs of the
    >> average person. The biggest thing that Photoshop simply has going for
    >> itself is the name.

    >
    > What utter nonsense. There are hundreds of thousand professional artists
    > who use it. Your, and mine, ignorance of its usage should not be used as
    > a justified reason to dispute its importance.


    What part about "Other than graphics artists and related" zoomed right
    over your head?

    >
    >> Now how about accounting?
    >>
    >> Sure, there is Quickbooks and the people I know in Accounting love some
    >> features about it. I also hear them curse and absolutely hate some
    >> other things about it. So it's got it's good and bad parts.

    >
    > No news there.
    >
    >
    >> But what about home users? Personally, I just use Gnucash and call it a
    >> day. I can enter all my expenses and bills and categorize things the
    >> way I want. And, it's got more graphs and reports to show with than I
    >> even know what they all mean. About the only report I give a crap about
    >> is the expense barchart so I can see where my expenses are and what may
    >> be worth looking at for improvement....So even if this program doesn't
    >> have all the features Quickbooks has, it already has more than I'll
    >> ever need...

    >
    > For home use, maybe fine. Does you local tax office except it though?
    > Mine doesn't.


    Well I said home use didn't I? Oh and, I don't know if they "accept"
    it...personally, I just hand them my W-2 forms when the time comes and
    call it a day.

    >
    >
    >> Office?
    >>
    >> Sure, Ms Office has some neat features. But let's be realistic....who
    >> needs a $300-$400 office package in order to write a letter to grandma?

    >
    > Huh? What are you waffling on about? O paid significantly less than that
    > and used word/excel for all sorts of things same as I now do with the
    > inferior OO equivalents.


    I'm waffling about the retail price if I go to a place like amazon.com
    for example for a retail, non-upgrade version.

    And if you can do everything you did with MS Office with OO as you state,
    how is it inferior? Why do you bother using OO then? Why don't you go
    back to the superior MS Office?

    >
    >
    >> Point that I'm trying to get across is, while all these high end
    >> packages may have some neat features that surely there are people out
    >> there, especially in the business world and maybe even on occasion in
    >> the home user world, who wouldn't want to or can't live without....for
    >> the masses at home, in my opinion, they are beyond overkill.

    >
    > I tend to agree in some cases.
    >
    >
    >> And so far, I've always been shown to be correct on that when
    >> introducing average people with little to know technical knowledge of
    >> any kind to Linux. It's those people, the people many windows advocates
    >> would claim could never handle linux because it's too complicated, that
    >> I've seen to best with it and none of them would want to return to
    >> windows.

    >
    > Unless they wanted proper connectivity with their PDA, their mobile or
    > wanted to play the latest games. I agree.


    Well on the note about the PDA, try syncing up my Japanese music
    collection under windows to ANYTHING. Wait...Windows can't properly
    handle the Japanese song names so all I get is garbled track
    names...there goes that out the window.

    Also, just because a machine runs Windows doesn't mean it's capable of
    running the latest games either. I wouldn't want to play any game beyond
    solitaire on a 512 meg "Vista capable" machine...

    Obviously everyone needs to evaluate their needs and make a correct
    choice based on that both in terms of system they purchase and the OS
    they use. I didn't say Linux (or windows for that matter) can meet 100%
    of all needs. Neither OS can do that.

    Would I recommend Linux to a high-end gamer? Hell no, I know better than
    that. Then again, I also realize that most people aren't high end gamers.
    And many of the so called "Casual games" that are available work
    extremely well under wine. I play them all the time during lunchtime at
    work.

    >
    >
    >> In some cases, they've even come to me and told me how they've had
    >> relatives switch away from windows based on their recommendation,
    >> completely uninfluenced and unassisted by me. Gee, can't be that
    >> complicated after all I suppose?

    >
    > I wouldn't say its necessarily complicated. I would say that not enough
    > "new gadgets" have decent Linux support though. The wireless scene is
    > still a mess IMO. And the video card support can still be hairy unless
    > you use a "non conforming to ideology" release like Ubuntu.


    Wireless isn't messy. Simply don't use a broad-com wireless card and
    problem solved. Why the flying **** is it that it's "ok" to expect people
    to choose vista compatible hardware but it's not ok to expect people to
    choose linux compatible hardware?

    It's like, people bitch whine and moan when linux doesn't support a
    particular piece of hardware. However when Vista doesn't support it, the
    answer just simply tends to be "You should have done your homework or
    contact the manufacturer". Lovely double standard.

    Both ATI and nVidia have downloadable linux drivers right on their
    website just like they do windows drivers. They are the two most common
    and major video card manufacturers in existence. Intel chipsets generally
    have built-in driver support on the kernel level so drivers generally
    aren't an issue. Yes I can acknowledge that there most certainly may
    exist the occasional system with an issue...but that is true for any OS.
    I can fill a whole page with hardware issues Vista has with my system
    during an Install...

    So what exactly is hairy? Oh right, you'll now go find some post
    somewhere where a person had trouble and proclaim that this means the
    entire world is in a state of suffering. Gotcha.

    >
    > Who here syncs their phone on Linux? I worked out my own way and posted
    > it here with ivman. (Oh I know I dont really use linux according to the
    > COLA morons). But things like that screw up people thinking of moving.


    I personally make phone calls with my phone...but that's just me.

    --
    Stephan
    1986 Pontiac Fiero GT

    君の事思い出す日なんてないのは
    君の事忘れたときがないから

  10. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    Stephan Rose writes:

    > On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:40:38 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Stephan Rose writes:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:35:30 -0400, nospam wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Ignoramus10476 wrote:
    >>>>> I used fedora for years and switched to Ubuntu. It is very well put
    >>>>> together and works much more smoothly than Fedora. It does have some
    >>>>> real benefits that accrue to users like me.
    >>>>
    >>>> I, too, agree that Ubuntu is more polished than the rest of the Linux
    >>>> distributions, but until big application makers such as Adobe and
    >>>> others support it with their first class applications, Linux is
    >>>> nothing, unfortunately
    >>>
    >>> Actually Adobe and others are fairly irrelevant.
    >>>
    >>> Sticking with Adobe, let's look at Photoshop.
    >>>
    >>> Other than graphics artists and related people, who actually legally
    >>> and legitimately owns and uses Photoshop? What percentage of people is
    >>> there that actually can use Photoshop to it's fullest extend? I know I
    >>> sure can't. I'm lucky if I can manage to draw a straight line.
    >>>
    >>> There is plenty of software in existence that can meet the needs of the
    >>> average person. The biggest thing that Photoshop simply has going for
    >>> itself is the name.

    >>
    >> What utter nonsense. There are hundreds of thousand professional artists
    >> who use it. Your, and mine, ignorance of its usage should not be used as
    >> a justified reason to dispute its importance.

    >
    > What part about "Other than graphics artists and related" zoomed right
    > over your head?


    I'll give you that one ....

    >
    >>
    >>> Now how about accounting?
    >>>
    >>> Sure, there is Quickbooks and the people I know in Accounting love some
    >>> features about it. I also hear them curse and absolutely hate some
    >>> other things about it. So it's got it's good and bad parts.

    >>
    >> No news there.
    >>
    >>
    >>> But what about home users? Personally, I just use Gnucash and call it a
    >>> day. I can enter all my expenses and bills and categorize things the
    >>> way I want. And, it's got more graphs and reports to show with than I
    >>> even know what they all mean. About the only report I give a crap about
    >>> is the expense barchart so I can see where my expenses are and what may
    >>> be worth looking at for improvement....So even if this program doesn't
    >>> have all the features Quickbooks has, it already has more than I'll
    >>> ever need...

    >>
    >> For home use, maybe fine. Does you local tax office except it though?
    >> Mine doesn't.

    >
    > Well I said home use didn't I? Oh and, I don't know if they "accept"
    > it...personally, I just hand them my W-2 forms when the time comes and
    > call it a day.


    Home use? Use excel in that case if tis for "fun". If you're self employed then you tend
    to use one solution for work and play. Not one for work one for play -
    there is little if any divide when the tax man comes calling.

    >
    >>
    >>
    >>> Office?
    >>>
    >>> Sure, Ms Office has some neat features. But let's be realistic....who
    >>> needs a $300-$400 office package in order to write a letter to grandma?

    >>
    >> Huh? What are you waffling on about? O paid significantly less than that
    >> and used word/excel for all sorts of things same as I now do with the
    >> inferior OO equivalents.

    >
    > I'm waffling about the retail price if I go to a place like amazon.com
    > for example for a retail, non-upgrade version.


    Oh, not the "real price" most pay.

    >
    > And if you can do everything you did with MS Office with OO as you state,
    > how is it inferior? Why do you bother using OO then? Why don't you go
    > back to the superior MS Office?


    Err, because I use Debian. Doesn't mean I have to give a virtual bj to
    every piece of OSS though. OO is sluggish and buggy and next to no one
    uses it in office desktop environments - at least I have never seen it
    in use in any small company (IT related or otherwise).

    >
    >>
    >>
    >>> Point that I'm trying to get across is, while all these high end
    >>> packages may have some neat features that surely there are people out
    >>> there, especially in the business world and maybe even on occasion in
    >>> the home user world, who wouldn't want to or can't live without....for
    >>> the masses at home, in my opinion, they are beyond overkill.

    >>
    >> I tend to agree in some cases.
    >>
    >>
    >>> And so far, I've always been shown to be correct on that when
    >>> introducing average people with little to know technical knowledge of
    >>> any kind to Linux. It's those people, the people many windows advocates
    >>> would claim could never handle linux because it's too complicated, that
    >>> I've seen to best with it and none of them would want to return to
    >>> windows.

    >>
    >> Unless they wanted proper connectivity with their PDA, their mobile or
    >> wanted to play the latest games. I agree.

    >
    > Well on the note about the PDA, try syncing up my Japanese music
    > collection under windows to ANYTHING. Wait...Windows can't properly
    > handle the Japanese song names so all I get is garbled track
    > names...there goes that out the window.


    Are you sure? i can not comment. I can tell you I worked on a DBCS
    solution years ago which worked fine in Windows in Japanese and OS/2.

    But please do not try to equate syncing Japanese music titles with
    Windows with not being able to sync your contact info with Linux in
    English or any other language. One is mission critical for the average
    businessman another is not.

    >
    > Also, just because a machine runs Windows doesn't mean it's capable of
    > running the latest games either. I wouldn't want to play any game beyond
    > solitaire on a 512 meg "Vista capable" machine...


    Because you have an agenda and makes things up. Most run just fine. And
    frankly, I'm not sure about your obsession with Vist. I used XP and it
    ran about 99.99% of games just fine from across the versions from the
    past 10 years. Yes, I know Mark Kent announced (and I kid you not) there
    is no binary compatibility across Windows versions but he is a fool.

    >
    > Obviously everyone needs to evaluate their needs and make a correct
    > choice based on that both in terms of system they purchase and the OS
    > they use. I didn't say Linux (or windows for that matter) can meet 100%
    > of all needs. Neither OS can do that.


    NO problem there. At least its not "Linux rox, Windoze sux" on your part.

    >
    > Would I recommend Linux to a high-end gamer? Hell no, I know better than
    > that. Then again, I also realize that most people aren't high end gamers.
    > And many of the so called "Casual games" that are available work
    > extremely well under wine. I play them all the time during lunchtime at
    > work.


    Please list them. Which modern games. Which distro. Which level of
    DirectX? I have to be honest here - I can almost never get Wine to work
    on Debian on my HW. Its a PITA. I dual boot for games. I used to run
    VMWare for other things but thats broken now with the 2.6.24 kernel - I
    need to wait for a source code patch. One of the pains in using Lenny
    but worth it.

    >
    >>
    >>
    >>> In some cases, they've even come to me and told me how they've had
    >>> relatives switch away from windows based on their recommendation,
    >>> completely uninfluenced and unassisted by me. Gee, can't be that
    >>> complicated after all I suppose?

    >>
    >> I wouldn't say its necessarily complicated. I would say that not enough
    >> "new gadgets" have decent Linux support though. The wireless scene is
    >> still a mess IMO. And the video card support can still be hairy unless
    >> you use a "non conforming to ideology" release like Ubuntu.

    >
    > Wireless isn't messy. Simply don't use a broad-com wireless card and
    > problem solved. Why the flying **** is it that it's "ok" to expect people
    > to choose vista compatible hardware but it's not ok to expect people to
    > choose linux compatible hardware?


    You KNOW that is bull****. You frequent the Ubuntu groups. You know
    there are still lots of issues with wireless. Getting better yes, but
    many people tried last year and got put off. People dont come back - its
    a shame but a fact.

    >
    > It's like, people bitch whine and moan when linux doesn't support a
    > particular piece of hardware. However when Vista doesn't support it, the
    > answer just simply tends to be "You should have done your homework or
    > contact the manufacturer". Lovely double standard.


    Vista is a new OS. It is to be expected to a degree. But you're
    essentially right. The problem is that in the past too much of Linux
    had to be hand done - newer installers have addressed that. Fortunately
    Mark Shuttleworth and co are not "COLA advocates" or they would have
    shown their arses and said "works for me you Windoze morons".

    >
    > Both ATI and nVidia have downloadable linux drivers right on their
    > website just like they do windows drivers. They are the two most common
    > and major video card manufacturers in existence. Intel chipsets generally
    > have built-in driver support on the kernel level so drivers generally
    > aren't an issue. Yes I can acknowledge that there most certainly may
    > exist the occasional system with an issue...but that is true for any OS.
    > I can fill a whole page with hardware issues Vista has with my system
    > during an Install...
    >
    > So what exactly is hairy? Oh right, you'll now go find some post
    > somewhere where a person had trouble and proclaim that this means the
    > entire world is in a state of suffering. Gotcha.


    No. But unlike you I live in the real world. And when a new Kernel comes
    out for Debian I end up with no X once more and have to go through the
    usual hoops. Not difficult for me NOW but once was a PITA. You are also
    aware of the ongoing development of Envy too? Why was this if it all
    just worked?

    Do you have any idea how hard or conceptually difficult it was for the
    average user to download, compile and install an Nvidia driver? This is
    one of the big issues with too many Linux heads - they forget how hard
    it was to get that level of knowledge.

    >
    >>
    >> Who here syncs their phone on Linux? I worked out my own way and posted
    >> it here with ivman. (Oh I know I dont really use linux according to the
    >> COLA morons). But things like that screw up people thinking of moving.

    >
    > I personally make phone calls with my phone...but that's just me.


    I do too funnily enough so your little dig fails.. But if you're happy
    not utilising modern features for back up and single centralised
    repository of contact info then good luck to you. However, most
    professional people and companies would be considered irresponsible if
    they did not sync their phones with their pda/exchange on a regular
    basis. In Linux it is a mess. Sorry, but it is. And real people using
    real desktops in a responsible and professional way will not do without
    this type of stuff.

    --
    Charles Briscoe-Smith :
    After all, the gzip package is called `gzip', not `libz-bin'...

    James Troup :
    Uh, probably because the gzip binary doesn't come from the
    non-existent libz package or the existent zlib package.
    -- debian-bugs-dist

  11. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    Stephan Rose wrote:

    > Actually Adobe and others are fairly irrelevant.
    >
    > Sticking with Adobe, let's look at Photoshop.
    >
    > Other than graphics artists and related people, who actually legally and
    > legitimately owns and uses Photoshop? What percentage of people is there
    > that actually can use Photoshop to it's fullest extend? I know I sure
    > can't. I'm lucky if I can manage to draw a straight line.


    ....Linux then is for you...

  12. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:54:55 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > Stephan Rose writes:
    >
    >> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:40:38 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Stephan Rose writes:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:35:30 -0400, nospam wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Ignoramus10476 wrote:
    >>>>>> I used fedora for years and switched to Ubuntu. It is very well put
    >>>>>> together and works much more smoothly than Fedora. It does have
    >>>>>> some real benefits that accrue to users like me.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I, too, agree that Ubuntu is more polished than the rest of the
    >>>>> Linux distributions, but until big application makers such as Adobe
    >>>>> and others support it with their first class applications, Linux is
    >>>>> nothing, unfortunately
    >>>>
    >>>> Actually Adobe and others are fairly irrelevant.
    >>>>
    >>>> Sticking with Adobe, let's look at Photoshop.
    >>>>
    >>>> Other than graphics artists and related people, who actually legally
    >>>> and legitimately owns and uses Photoshop? What percentage of people
    >>>> is there that actually can use Photoshop to it's fullest extend? I
    >>>> know I sure can't. I'm lucky if I can manage to draw a straight line.
    >>>>
    >>>> There is plenty of software in existence that can meet the needs of
    >>>> the average person. The biggest thing that Photoshop simply has going
    >>>> for itself is the name.
    >>>
    >>> What utter nonsense. There are hundreds of thousand professional
    >>> artists who use it. Your, and mine, ignorance of its usage should not
    >>> be used as a justified reason to dispute its importance.

    >>
    >> What part about "Other than graphics artists and related" zoomed right
    >> over your head?

    >
    > I'll give you that one ....


    Oh, boy...

    >
    >
    >>
    >>>> Now how about accounting?
    >>>>
    >>>> Sure, there is Quickbooks and the people I know in Accounting love
    >>>> some features about it. I also hear them curse and absolutely hate
    >>>> some other things about it. So it's got it's good and bad parts.
    >>>
    >>> No news there.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> But what about home users? Personally, I just use Gnucash and call it
    >>>> a day. I can enter all my expenses and bills and categorize things
    >>>> the way I want. And, it's got more graphs and reports to show with
    >>>> than I even know what they all mean. About the only report I give a
    >>>> crap about is the expense barchart so I can see where my expenses are
    >>>> and what may be worth looking at for improvement....So even if this
    >>>> program doesn't have all the features Quickbooks has, it already has
    >>>> more than I'll ever need...
    >>>
    >>> For home use, maybe fine. Does you local tax office except it though?
    >>> Mine doesn't.

    >>
    >> Well I said home use didn't I? Oh and, I don't know if they "accept"
    >> it...personally, I just hand them my W-2 forms when the time comes and
    >> call it a day.

    >
    > Home use? Use excel in that case if tis for "fun". If you're self
    > employed then you tend to use one solution for work and play. Not one
    > for work one for play - there is little if any divide when the tax man
    > comes calling.


    If you are self employed and you use one for work, aren't you supposed to
    pay for another one to play with?

    >>>
    >>>> Office?
    >>>>
    >>>> Sure, Ms Office has some neat features. But let's be realistic....who
    >>>> needs a $300-$400 office package in order to write a letter to
    >>>> grandma?
    >>>
    >>> Huh? What are you waffling on about? O paid significantly less than
    >>> that and used word/excel for all sorts of things same as I now do with
    >>> the inferior OO equivalents.

    >>
    >> I'm waffling about the retail price if I go to a place like amazon.com
    >> for example for a retail, non-upgrade version.

    >
    > Oh, not the "real price" most pay.


    What "real price" most people play?

    >
    >
    >> And if you can do everything you did with MS Office with OO as you
    >> state, how is it inferior? Why do you bother using OO then? Why don't
    >> you go back to the superior MS Office?

    >
    > Err, because I use Debian.


    Why do you use something you continually critisize?

    > Doesn't mean I have to give a virtual bj to
    > every piece of OSS though. OO is sluggish and buggy and next to no one
    > uses it in office desktop environments - at least I have never seen it
    > in use in any small company (IT related or otherwise).


    Go to Largo, FL and look at their city government offices. Go to Ernie
    Ball, look around.

    >
    >
    >>
    >>>
    >>>> Point that I'm trying to get across is, while all these high end
    >>>> packages may have some neat features that surely there are people out
    >>>> there, especially in the business world and maybe even on occasion in
    >>>> the home user world, who wouldn't want to or can't live
    >>>> without....for the masses at home, in my opinion, they are beyond
    >>>> overkill.
    >>>
    >>> I tend to agree in some cases.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> And so far, I've always been shown to be correct on that when
    >>>> introducing average people with little to know technical knowledge of
    >>>> any kind to Linux. It's those people, the people many windows
    >>>> advocates would claim could never handle linux because it's too
    >>>> complicated, that I've seen to best with it and none of them would
    >>>> want to return to windows.
    >>>
    >>> Unless they wanted proper connectivity with their PDA, their mobile or
    >>> wanted to play the latest games. I agree.


    I have proper connectivity with my PDA.

    >>
    >> Well on the note about the PDA, try syncing up my Japanese music
    >> collection under windows to ANYTHING. Wait...Windows can't properly
    >> handle the Japanese song names so all I get is garbled track
    >> names...there goes that out the window.

    >
    > Are you sure? i can not comment. I can tell you I worked on a DBCS
    > solution years ago which worked fine in Windows in Japanese and OS/2.
    >
    > But please do not try to equate syncing Japanese music titles with
    > Windows with not being able to sync your contact info with Linux in
    > English or any other language. One is mission critical for the average
    > businessman another is not.
    >
    >
    >> Also, just because a machine runs Windows doesn't mean it's capable of
    >> running the latest games either. I wouldn't want to play any game
    >> beyond solitaire on a 512 meg "Vista capable" machine...

    >
    > Because you have an agenda and makes things up.


    .... like you don't have an agenda?

    > Most run just fine. And
    > frankly, I'm not sure about your obsession with Vist. I used XP and it
    > ran about 99.99% of games just fine from across the versions from the
    > past 10 years. Yes, I know Mark Kent announced (and I kid you not) there
    > is no binary compatibility across Windows versions but he is a fool.
    >
    >
    >> Obviously everyone needs to evaluate their needs and make a correct
    >> choice based on that both in terms of system they purchase and the OS
    >> they use. I didn't say Linux (or windows for that matter) can meet 100%
    >> of all needs. Neither OS can do that.

    >
    > NO problem there. At least its not "Linux rox, Windoze sux" on your
    > part.


    And what part of "Linux rox, Windoze sux" is all that bad? UF says the
    same thing about FSU.

    >
    >
    >> Would I recommend Linux to a high-end gamer? Hell no, I know better
    >> than that. Then again, I also realize that most people aren't high end
    >> gamers. And many of the so called "Casual games" that are available
    >> work extremely well under wine. I play them all the time during
    >> lunchtime at work.

    >
    > Please list them. Which modern games. Which distro. Which level of
    > DirectX? I have to be honest here - I can almost never get Wine to work
    > on Debian on my HW. Its a PITA. I dual boot for games. I used to run
    > VMWare for other things but thats broken now with the 2.6.24 kernel - I
    > need to wait for a source code patch. One of the pains in using Lenny
    > but worth it.


    You used VMWare, non-accelerated VMWare, to play graphics intensive
    games? Uh huh.

    >
    >
    >>
    >>>
    >>>> In some cases, they've even come to me and told me how they've had
    >>>> relatives switch away from windows based on their recommendation,
    >>>> completely uninfluenced and unassisted by me. Gee, can't be that
    >>>> complicated after all I suppose?
    >>>
    >>> I wouldn't say its necessarily complicated. I would say that not
    >>> enough "new gadgets" have decent Linux support though. The wireless
    >>> scene is still a mess IMO. And the video card support can still be
    >>> hairy unless you use a "non conforming to ideology" release like
    >>> Ubuntu.

    >>
    >> Wireless isn't messy. Simply don't use a broad-com wireless card and
    >> problem solved. Why the flying **** is it that it's "ok" to expect
    >> people to choose vista compatible hardware but it's not ok to expect
    >> people to choose linux compatible hardware?

    >
    > You KNOW that is bull****. You frequent the Ubuntu groups. You know
    > there are still lots of issues with wireless. Getting better yes, but
    > many people tried last year and got put off. People dont come back - its
    > a shame but a fact.


    Obviously people that have had problems. OTOH, I haven't had problems for
    years.

    >
    >
    >> It's like, people bitch whine and moan when linux doesn't support a
    >> particular piece of hardware. However when Vista doesn't support it,
    >> the answer just simply tends to be "You should have done your homework
    >> or contact the manufacturer". Lovely double standard.

    >
    > Vista is a new OS. It is to be expected to a degree. But you're


    So, since vendors, as a whole, haven't supported Linux, why blame Linux?


    > essentially right. The problem is that in the past too much of Linux had
    > to be hand done - newer installers have addressed that.


    That has been addressed for a few years now.

    > Fortunately Mark
    > Shuttleworth and co are not "COLA advocates" or they would have shown
    > their arses and said "works for me you Windoze morons".
    >
    >
    >> Both ATI and nVidia have downloadable linux drivers right on their
    >> website just like they do windows drivers. They are the two most common
    >> and major video card manufacturers in existence. Intel chipsets
    >> generally have built-in driver support on the kernel level so drivers
    >> generally aren't an issue. Yes I can acknowledge that there most
    >> certainly may exist the occasional system with an issue...but that is
    >> true for any OS. I can fill a whole page with hardware issues Vista has
    >> with my system during an Install...
    >>
    >> So what exactly is hairy? Oh right, you'll now go find some post
    >> somewhere where a person had trouble and proclaim that this means the
    >> entire world is in a state of suffering. Gotcha.

    >
    > No. But unlike you I live in the real world. And when a new Kernel comes
    > out for Debian I end up with no X once more and have to go through the
    > usual hoops.


    .... only if you install the new kernel. With PCLOS, if a new kernel comes
    out, and I install it, everything is updated, including kernel specific
    drivers.

    > Not difficult for me NOW but once was a PITA. You are also
    > aware of the ongoing development of Envy too? Why was this if it all
    > just worked?
    >
    > Do you have any idea how hard or conceptually difficult it was for the
    > average user to download, compile and install an Nvidia driver?


    Was.

    >This is
    > one of the big issues with too many Linux heads - they forget how hard
    > it was to get that level of knowledge.


    Was.

    >>> Who here syncs their phone on Linux? I worked out my own way and
    >>> posted it here with ivman. (Oh I know I dont really use linux
    >>> according to the COLA morons). But things like that screw up people
    >>> thinking of moving.

    >>
    >> I personally make phone calls with my phone...but that's just me.

    >
    > I do too funnily enough so your little dig fails.. But if you're happy
    > not utilising modern features for back up and single centralised
    > repository of contact info then good luck to you. However, most
    > professional people and companies would be considered irresponsible if
    > they did not sync their phones with their pda/exchange on a regular
    > basis. In Linux it is a mess. Sorry, but it is. And real people using
    > real desktops in a responsible and professional way will not do without
    > this type of stuff.


    --
    Rick

  13. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.


    "Moshe Goldfarb" wrote in message
    news:r690jbpnqhdr.1bt1uyjci3i92.dlg@40tude.net...

    > It's all about standards.


    Yep, and that is why ODF is winning over MOOXML. Microsoft isn't standard
    in squat, all of Microsoft is proprietary, closed etc.

    > Do you think an accountant is going to take a chance using your Gnucash
    > files?


    Why not? He can even audit the code. It isn't like Excel libraries haven't
    had issues with math.
    http://www.computerworld.com/action/...icleId=9039058

    > Even if his program can read them, why would he put himself in a
    > potentially legally troubling situation like that?


    Doubtful and has never happened.

    > Do you think a lawyer is going to take a chance with OpenOffice importing
    > Microsoft Word documents EXACTLY?


    That hasn't been much of a problem for 4 years or so.

    Or do you mean like back doors and easter eggs?

    http://www.eeggs.com/tree/558.html

    OpenOffice is safer, as even saves in PDF without the need to purchase
    Adobe. More people have viewed and vetted the code too. More bucks in your
    pocket.

    > When every single comma, period and so forth can make a big difference in
    > the interpretation of the document do you think a law office would take a
    > chance on Open Office?


    More reason to use OpenOffice.

    > They would have to be crazy...
    > For $300 or less they can have the real macoy, MS Office.
    > Why go with a copycat?


    MS Office isn't the real McCoy ether, others were long before it. We
    survived changing to Word, we will survive changing from word.

    In my area, I can get a discount, $329 for Office 2007 Pro OEM. They didn't
    list Visio but I hear it is pricy. So I use OpenOffice and Dia and spend
    the $329 on beer.

    Times evolve. But some sticks in the mud do not.



  14. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:54:55 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > Stephan Rose writes:
    >
    >> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:40:38 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Stephan Rose writes:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:35:30 -0400, nospam wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Ignoramus10476 wrote:
    >>>>>> I used fedora for years and switched to Ubuntu. It is very well put
    >>>>>> together and works much more smoothly than Fedora. It does have
    >>>>>> some real benefits that accrue to users like me.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I, too, agree that Ubuntu is more polished than the rest of the
    >>>>> Linux distributions, but until big application makers such as Adobe
    >>>>> and others support it with their first class applications, Linux is
    >>>>> nothing, unfortunately
    >>>>
    >>>> Actually Adobe and others are fairly irrelevant.
    >>>>
    >>>> Sticking with Adobe, let's look at Photoshop.
    >>>>
    >>>> Other than graphics artists and related people, who actually legally
    >>>> and legitimately owns and uses Photoshop? What percentage of people
    >>>> is there that actually can use Photoshop to it's fullest extend? I
    >>>> know I sure can't. I'm lucky if I can manage to draw a straight line.
    >>>>
    >>>> There is plenty of software in existence that can meet the needs of
    >>>> the average person. The biggest thing that Photoshop simply has going
    >>>> for itself is the name.
    >>>
    >>> What utter nonsense. There are hundreds of thousand professional
    >>> artists who use it. Your, and mine, ignorance of its usage should not
    >>> be used as a justified reason to dispute its importance.

    >>
    >> What part about "Other than graphics artists and related" zoomed right
    >> over your head?

    >
    > I'll give you that one ....
    >
    >
    >>
    >>>> Now how about accounting?
    >>>>
    >>>> Sure, there is Quickbooks and the people I know in Accounting love
    >>>> some features about it. I also hear them curse and absolutely hate
    >>>> some other things about it. So it's got it's good and bad parts.
    >>>
    >>> No news there.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> But what about home users? Personally, I just use Gnucash and call it
    >>>> a day. I can enter all my expenses and bills and categorize things
    >>>> the way I want. And, it's got more graphs and reports to show with
    >>>> than I even know what they all mean. About the only report I give a
    >>>> crap about is the expense barchart so I can see where my expenses are
    >>>> and what may be worth looking at for improvement....So even if this
    >>>> program doesn't have all the features Quickbooks has, it already has
    >>>> more than I'll ever need...
    >>>
    >>> For home use, maybe fine. Does you local tax office except it though?
    >>> Mine doesn't.

    >>
    >> Well I said home use didn't I? Oh and, I don't know if they "accept"
    >> it...personally, I just hand them my W-2 forms when the time comes and
    >> call it a day.

    >
    > Home use? Use excel in that case if tis for "fun". If you're self
    > employed then you tend to use one solution for work and play. Not one
    > for work one for play - there is little if any divide when the tax man
    > comes calling.


    Self employed isn't exactly called home use now is it?

    And why don't I use excel? Because gnucash does a far better job than a
    simple spreadsheet ever could. I don't do it for fun, I use it to keep an
    overview of my finances and make plans on larger purchases.

    >
    >
    >>
    >>>
    >>>> Office?
    >>>>
    >>>> Sure, Ms Office has some neat features. But let's be realistic....who
    >>>> needs a $300-$400 office package in order to write a letter to
    >>>> grandma?
    >>>
    >>> Huh? What are you waffling on about? O paid significantly less than
    >>> that and used word/excel for all sorts of things same as I now do with
    >>> the inferior OO equivalents.

    >>
    >> I'm waffling about the retail price if I go to a place like amazon.com
    >> for example for a retail, non-upgrade version.

    >
    > Oh, not the "real price" most pay.


    And what is the "real price"? $20 from their local piracy download
    website?

    Personally, if I wanted office right now, I have a choice of going to a
    site like amazon.com and paying what MS wants retail or I suppose I could
    try to scrounge up a used copy on ebay and hope it isn't pirated.

    >
    >
    >> And if you can do everything you did with MS Office with OO as you
    >> state, how is it inferior? Why do you bother using OO then? Why don't
    >> you go back to the superior MS Office?

    >
    > Err, because I use Debian. Doesn't mean I have to give a virtual bj to
    > every piece of OSS though. OO is sluggish and buggy and next to no one
    > uses it in office desktop environments - at least I have never seen it
    > in use in any small company (IT related or otherwise).


    So because you've never seen it nobody uses it? Understood.

    >
    >
    >>
    >>>
    >>>> Point that I'm trying to get across is, while all these high end
    >>>> packages may have some neat features that surely there are people out
    >>>> there, especially in the business world and maybe even on occasion in
    >>>> the home user world, who wouldn't want to or can't live
    >>>> without....for the masses at home, in my opinion, they are beyond
    >>>> overkill.
    >>>
    >>> I tend to agree in some cases.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> And so far, I've always been shown to be correct on that when
    >>>> introducing average people with little to know technical knowledge of
    >>>> any kind to Linux. It's those people, the people many windows
    >>>> advocates would claim could never handle linux because it's too
    >>>> complicated, that I've seen to best with it and none of them would
    >>>> want to return to windows.
    >>>
    >>> Unless they wanted proper connectivity with their PDA, their mobile or
    >>> wanted to play the latest games. I agree.

    >>
    >> Well on the note about the PDA, try syncing up my Japanese music
    >> collection under windows to ANYTHING. Wait...Windows can't properly
    >> handle the Japanese song names so all I get is garbled track
    >> names...there goes that out the window.

    >
    > Are you sure? i can not comment. I can tell you I worked on a DBCS
    > solution years ago which worked fine in Windows in Japanese and OS/2.


    I have over 20 Japanese CD's and over 10 DVDs (which will not play under
    Vista due to region coding and there is no 3rd party solution currently
    to circumvent this for Vista and due to Vista's crap there may never be I
    suspect).

    So yes, I am extremely sure. XP doesn't have the problem with the DVDs,
    3rd party solutions exist to circumvent the region coding. However, it
    also can't handle my music collection. YES I have tried under both vista
    *and* xp.

    >
    > But please do not try to equate syncing Japanese music titles with
    > Windows with not being able to sync your contact info with Linux in
    > English or any other language. One is mission critical for the average
    > businessman another is not.


    Really? What if the businessman happens to be Japanese? What if the
    businessman does business with Japanese or Chinese companies?

    Windows' support in that regard is absolutely pathetic. But we all know
    what excellent multi-language support and commitment Microsoft has
    towards multi-languages when their idea of support is an "Ultimate-only
    add-on".

    >
    >
    >> Also, just because a machine runs Windows doesn't mean it's capable of
    >> running the latest games either. I wouldn't want to play any game
    >> beyond solitaire on a 512 meg "Vista capable" machine...

    >
    > Because you have an agenda and makes things up. Most run just fine. And
    > frankly, I'm not sure about your obsession with Vist. I used XP and it
    > ran about 99.99% of games just fine from across the versions from the
    > past 10 years. Yes, I know Mark Kent announced (and I kid you not) there
    > is no binary compatibility across Windows versions but he is a fool.


    WTF are you smoking?

    http://fear.filefront.com/info/system

    That for instance are the system requirements for F.E.A.R.

    1 gig of ram minimum with a 128meg video card.

    You're telling me that game would run just fine on a low-spec 512mb Vista
    capable machine when the minimum requirements are twice that high?

    And that isn't even all that new...

    Let's try a NEW game shall we? How about Crysis. That is fairly recent.

    http://www.crysis-online.com/Informa...0Requirements/

    1 gigs ram, 1.5 gigs ram on Vista!

    So according to you, that would run just fine on a 512mb "vista capable
    machine"....

    Do I seriously need to keep going?

    Oh and as far as my "obession" with Vista is, XP is dead. It's a
    discontinued OS. As much as I may not like Vista, and I really don't, XP
    is a dead end as far as the windows world is concerned. The only reason
    it is still on my hard drive is because I don't currently have a pressing
    need to install Vista. However, I already have the problem that some
    games I've played, while they don't require DX10, have features that are
    DX10 only. Only way to get DX10 is Vista.

    I may not like it, but that's reality.

    >
    >
    >> Obviously everyone needs to evaluate their needs and make a correct
    >> choice based on that both in terms of system they purchase and the OS
    >> they use. I didn't say Linux (or windows for that matter) can meet 100%
    >> of all needs. Neither OS can do that.

    >
    > NO problem there. At least its not "Linux rox, Windoze sux" on your
    > part.
    >
    >
    >> Would I recommend Linux to a high-end gamer? Hell no, I know better
    >> than that. Then again, I also realize that most people aren't high end
    >> gamers. And many of the so called "Casual games" that are available
    >> work extremely well under wine. I play them all the time during
    >> lunchtime at work.

    >
    > Please list them. Which modern games. Which distro. Which level of
    > DirectX? I have to be honest here - I can almost never get Wine to work
    > on Debian on my HW. Its a PITA. I dual boot for games. I used to run
    > VMWare for other things but thats broken now with the 2.6.24 kernel - I
    > need to wait for a source code patch. One of the pains in using Lenny
    > but worth it.


    I've never had any problem with any of the games here:

    http://www.oberongames.com/default_wflash.asp

    Most games here I've had good success with, though on occasion there is
    one that won't work:

    http://www.fenomen-games.com/

    Oh and, you realize that VMWare completely discredits you as far as
    gaming goes right? VMWare does not have 3D Hardware Acceleration support.
    It has experimental support which has to be manually enabled for DX8 and
    that's about it.

    And which distro, well you know I use Ubuntu so...

    >
    >
    >>
    >>>
    >>>> In some cases, they've even come to me and told me how they've had
    >>>> relatives switch away from windows based on their recommendation,
    >>>> completely uninfluenced and unassisted by me. Gee, can't be that
    >>>> complicated after all I suppose?
    >>>
    >>> I wouldn't say its necessarily complicated. I would say that not
    >>> enough "new gadgets" have decent Linux support though. The wireless
    >>> scene is still a mess IMO. And the video card support can still be
    >>> hairy unless you use a "non conforming to ideology" release like
    >>> Ubuntu.

    >>
    >> Wireless isn't messy. Simply don't use a broad-com wireless card and
    >> problem solved. Why the flying **** is it that it's "ok" to expect
    >> people to choose vista compatible hardware but it's not ok to expect
    >> people to choose linux compatible hardware?

    >
    > You KNOW that is bull****. You frequent the Ubuntu groups. You know
    > there are still lots of issues with wireless. Getting better yes, but
    > many people tried last year and got put off. People dont come back - its
    > a shame but a fact.


    I know that Intel Wireless is supported out of the box. I know that I own
    Intel wireless cards that work plug and play. I know that broadcom is not
    supported. Therefore, I stick to Intel and don't have problems.

    Same with printers. It's known that Cannon is not supported while HP has
    excellent support. So, I stick to HP. See how easy that is?

    >
    >
    >> It's like, people bitch whine and moan when linux doesn't support a
    >> particular piece of hardware. However when Vista doesn't support it,
    >> the answer just simply tends to be "You should have done your homework
    >> or contact the manufacturer". Lovely double standard.

    >
    > Vista is a new OS. It is to be expected to a degree. But you're
    > essentially right. The problem is that in the past too much of Linux had
    > to be hand done - newer installers have addressed that. Fortunately Mark
    > Shuttleworth and co are not "COLA advocates" or they would have shown
    > their arses and said "works for me you Windoze morons".


    No Vista is NOT a new OS. It is a *new version* of an existing OS. There
    is absolutely no excuse and it is NOT to be expected to any degree. Well,
    Microsoft apologists may expect it but the average consumer surely
    doesn't give a crap. They only want to know why the hardware that used to
    work fine now doesn't.

    >
    >
    >> Both ATI and nVidia have downloadable linux drivers right on their
    >> website just like they do windows drivers. They are the two most common
    >> and major video card manufacturers in existence. Intel chipsets
    >> generally have built-in driver support on the kernel level so drivers
    >> generally aren't an issue. Yes I can acknowledge that there most
    >> certainly may exist the occasional system with an issue...but that is
    >> true for any OS. I can fill a whole page with hardware issues Vista has
    >> with my system during an Install...
    >>
    >> So what exactly is hairy? Oh right, you'll now go find some post
    >> somewhere where a person had trouble and proclaim that this means the
    >> entire world is in a state of suffering. Gotcha.

    >
    > No. But unlike you I live in the real world. And when a new Kernel comes
    > out for Debian I end up with no X once more and have to go through the
    > usual hoops. Not difficult for me NOW but once was a PITA. You are also
    > aware of the ongoing development of Envy too? Why was this if it all
    > just worked?


    Well it isn't my fault that Debian can't get kernel upgrades right
    without breaking your system. Don't have the problem under Ubuntu. Not
    even under frigging Hardy Heron Alpha/Beta do I have that problem and
    I've gone through a few kernel upgrades. They are always accompanied by
    an upgrade to the restricted module package as well to keep drivers
    working. If Debian developers can't do that, don't blame Linux as a whole.

    >
    > Do you have any idea how hard or conceptually difficult it was for the
    > average user to download, compile and install an Nvidia driver? This is
    > one of the big issues with too many Linux heads - they forget how hard
    > it was to get that level of knowledge.


    I don't suggest the average user go run slackware for crying out loud. Go
    run Ubuntu and call it a day...no need to download / compile / install
    it. Just simply click the enable button, that is what it is there for!

    >
    >
    >>
    >>> Who here syncs their phone on Linux? I worked out my own way and
    >>> posted it here with ivman. (Oh I know I dont really use linux
    >>> according to the COLA morons). But things like that screw up people
    >>> thinking of moving.

    >>
    >> I personally make phone calls with my phone...but that's just me.

    >
    > I do too funnily enough so your little dig fails.. But if you're happy
    > not utilising modern features for back up and single centralised
    > repository of contact info then good luck to you. However, most
    > professional people and companies would be considered irresponsible if
    > they did not sync their phones with their pda/exchange on a regular
    > basis. In Linux it is a mess. Sorry, but it is. And real people using
    > real desktops in a responsible and professional way will not do without
    > this type of stuff.


    Man, I must be working with some irresponsible companies and
    professionals then. I guess I'll have to let everyone know that they are
    idiots on Monday morning...

    --
    Stephan
    1986 Pontiac Fiero GT

    君の事思い出す日なんてないのは
    君の事忘れたときがないから

  15. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 14:00:08 -0400, nospam wrote:

    > Stephan Rose wrote:
    >
    >> Actually Adobe and others are fairly irrelevant.
    >>
    >> Sticking with Adobe, let's look at Photoshop.
    >>
    >> Other than graphics artists and related people, who actually legally
    >> and legitimately owns and uses Photoshop? What percentage of people is
    >> there that actually can use Photoshop to it's fullest extend? I know I
    >> sure can't. I'm lucky if I can manage to draw a straight line.

    >
    > ...Linux then is for you...


    ....and it does quite well for me.

    --
    Stephan
    1986 Pontiac Fiero GT

    君の事思い出す日なんてないのは
    君の事忘れたときがないから

  16. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    Stephan Rose wrote:

    >Hadron quacked:
    >>
    >> Because you have an agenda and makes things up. Most run just fine. And
    >> frankly, I'm not sure about your obsession with Vist. I used XP and it
    >> ran about 99.99% of games just fine from across the versions from the
    >> past 10 years. Yes, I know Mark Kent announced (and I kid you not)
    >> there is no binary compatibility across Windows versions but he is a
    >> fool.

    >
    > WTF are you smoking?


    I see "true Linux advocate" Hadron Quack is still advocating away...
    What a POS.

  17. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.



    "Stephan Rose" wrote in message
    news:-sadnaELa_FaaXLanZ2dnUVZ_uHinZ2d@giganews.com...


    > And what is the "real price"? $20 from their local piracy download
    > website?
    >
    > Personally, if I wanted office right now, I have a choice of going to a
    > site like amazon.com and paying what MS wants retail or I suppose I could
    > try to scrounge up a used copy on ebay and hope it isn't pirated.


    So $120 then, not $400.
    And that's for three PCs.

    Not as cheap as OO but not exactly expensive.
    Star office costs $90 on amazon BTW.

    BTW you can get M$ office for less if you shop around.


  18. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    chrisv writes:

    > Stephan Rose wrote:
    >
    >>Hadron quacked:
    >>>
    >>> Because you have an agenda and makes things up. Most run just fine. And
    >>> frankly, I'm not sure about your obsession with Vist. I used XP and it
    >>> ran about 99.99% of games just fine from across the versions from the
    >>> past 10 years. Yes, I know Mark Kent announced (and I kid you not)
    >>> there is no binary compatibility across Windows versions but he is a
    >>> fool.

    >>
    >> WTF are you smoking?


    Which part of the text above do you disagree with?

    >
    > I see "true Linux advocate" Hadron Quack is still advocating away...
    > What a POS.


    You have no idea what we are talking about. Again.

  19. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.



    "Stephan Rose" wrote in message
    news:-sadnaELa_FaaXLanZ2dnUVZ_uHinZ2d@giganews.com...

    8<

    > I have over 20 Japanese CD's and over 10 DVDs (which will not play under
    > Vista due to region coding and there is no 3rd party solution currently
    > to circumvent this for Vista and due to Vista's crap there may never be I
    > suspect).
    >
    > So yes, I am extremely sure. XP doesn't have the problem with the DVDs,
    > 3rd party solutions exist to circumvent the region coding. However, it
    > also can't handle my music collection. YES I have tried under both vista
    > *and* xp.


    You haven't tried very hard.
    I just loaded the same solution I was using on XP, no problems.
    DVD43.




  20. Re: How unpopular is Ubuntu Linux, just take a look.

    On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 18:52:07 GMT, Canuck57 wrote:

    > "Moshe Goldfarb" wrote in message
    > news:r690jbpnqhdr.1bt1uyjci3i92.dlg@40tude.net...
    >
    >> It's all about standards.

    >
    > Yep, and that is why ODF is winning over MOOXML. Microsoft isn't standard
    > in squat, all of Microsoft is proprietary, closed etc.
    >
    >> Do you think an accountant is going to take a chance using your Gnucash
    >> files?

    >
    > Why not? He can even audit the code. It isn't like Excel libraries haven't
    > had issues with math.
    > http://www.computerworld.com/action/...icleId=9039058


    Notice the switch to Windows......
    A classic Linux advocate technique.

    As for the source code, that's nice...
    Who cares?
    Only a programmer can read it anyway.

    >> Even if his program can read them, why would he put himself in a
    >> potentially legally troubling situation like that?

    >
    > Doubtful and has never happened.


    How do you know?
    And why take a chance?
    Why not use what everyone else is using?
    Why be an oddball?
    Why be the square peg when every hole is round?
    For what?
    The security of knowing it *might* work?

    I don't think so.


    >> Do you think a lawyer is going to take a chance with OpenOffice importing
    >> Microsoft Word documents EXACTLY?

    >
    > That hasn't been much of a problem for 4 years or so.


    Sure it is.
    OpenOffice even has problems with simple documents.
    And again why take the chance?


    > Or do you mean like back doors and easter eggs?
    >
    > http://www.eeggs.com/tree/558.html


    Who cares?

    I don't care about weird comments and stuff in the kernel source either.


    > OpenOffice is safer, as even saves in PDF without the need to purchase
    > Adobe. More people have viewed and vetted the code too. More bucks in your
    > pocket.


    Not when everyone else is using MS Office it isn't *safer*.

    Can you guarantee me that my documents will transfer perfectly to
    Openoffice and back again?
    If not, don't bother asking me to use Open Office.


    >> When every single comma, period and so forth can make a big difference in
    >> the interpretation of the document do you think a law office would take a
    >> chance on Open Office?

    >
    > More reason to use OpenOffice.


    Not when everyone else using MSOffice.


    >> They would have to be crazy...
    >> For $300 or less they can have the real macoy, MS Office.
    >> Why go with a copycat?

    >
    > MS Office isn't the real McCoy ether, others were long before it. We
    > survived changing to Word, we will survive changing from word.


    I've been hearing that one for at least 10 years.

    Is this year, 2008 the year of Linux?


    > In my area, I can get a discount, $329 for Office 2007 Pro OEM. They didn't
    > list Visio but I hear it is pricy. So I use OpenOffice and Dia and spend
    > the $329 on beer.


    Good for you.

    > Times evolve. But some sticks in the mud do not.


    Tell me about it.

    Linux has been sitting at 0.6 percent of the desktop market for years
    despite being free.

    Open Office hasn't even put a dent in MSOffice despite being free.

    So what's wrong with these sticks in the mud that they can't gain market
    share when they are free and the competition is expensive?



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast